Abstract
Honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) queens mate early in life and store sperm for years. Male bees likely contribute significantly to sperm survival. Proteins were extracted from seminal vesicles and semen of mature drones, separated by electrophoresis, and analysed by peptide mass fingerprinting. Computer searches against three databases, general species, honey bees and fruit flies, were performed. Spectra were used to query the recently generated honey bee genome protein list as well as general species and fruit fly databases. Of the 69 unique honey bee proteins found, 66 are also in Drosophila melanogaster. Two proteins only matched honey bee genes and one is a widespread protein lost from the fly genome. There is over-representation of genes implicated in the glycolysis pathway. Metabolism-associated proteins were found primarily in the seminal vesicle. Male accessory gland proteins as identified in Drosophila rarely had orthologs among proteins found in the honey bee. A complete listing of gel spots chosen including honey bee genome matches and Mascot searches of MALDI-TOF results with statistics is in the Supplementary table. MALDI-TOF spectra and more complete Mascot peptide mass fingerprinting data are available on request. Supplementary figs 1–3 show the stained protein gels.
Keywords: seminal vesicles, social insect, semen, reproduction
Introduction
Honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) queens, as in most other social Hymenoptera, mate early in life and then store sperm to be used throughout their lifetimes. There has been long-standing interest in the mechanisms that allow social insect sperm to survive at ambient temperatures for years and even decades (Taber & Blum, 1960; Boomsma et al., 2005). For the honey bee, these mechanisms have a practical application with respect to the long-term preservation of semen for artificial insemination (AI) (Laidlaw, 1977; Harbo, 1985; Moritz, 1989). Given restrictions on the movement of honey bee genetic stocks, mandates to select bees resistant to various parasites and pathogens, and new tools available for defining genetic traits, germplasm preservation is a critical requirement for applied work in honey bees.
Our results from antioxidant enzyme activity (Weirich et al., 2002) and gene expression (Collins et al., 2004) assays and the remarkable durability of semen stored alone at room temperature (Collins, 2000b) indicated that the honey bee males (drones) contribute significantly to the physiology of sperm storage. Therefore we initiated the study reported here to identify male-produced proteins involved in honey bee mating and sperm storage.
Extensive studies for Drosophila and several other insects show that the products of male accessory glands have significant effects on female physiology and behaviour (reviewed by Chapman, 2001; Wolfner, 2002; Gillott, 2003; Kubli, 2003), as well as on successful sperm transport and storage (Neubaum & Wolfner, 1999). Eighty-three accessory gland proteins (Acps) have been identified from flies (Wolfner, 2002) some of which have been confirmed to stimulate egg production and laying, reduce female receptivity to mates, mediate sperm storage, and provide microbial protection in the reproductive tract. Both seminal fluid and sperm must be present for the full range of effects to be expressed. We carried out computational searches for honey bee orthologs to the described fly Acps in this project with poor success, suggesting that the known high rates of sequence divergence for many of these proteins might make them indistinguishable across the 300 million years (my) separating flies and bees. Accordingly, we then carried out de novo searches for honey bee proteins implicated in sperm storage, by proteomic (MALDI-TOF peptide mass fingerprinting) analyses of proteins present in the seminal vesicles and in semen itself.
By the time that adult drones emerge from pupation spermatogenesis and spermiogenesis are complete (Bishop, 1920; Hoage & Kessel, 1968). During the first week of adult life, the sperm migrate from the testes to the seminal vesicles (Snodgrass, 1963) where they undergo the final stages of maturation. Figure 1 shows the dramatic difference in size of the testes of immature (Fig. 1a) and mature (Fig. 1b) drones. Also note that the seminal vesicles and the mucus glands become filled in the mature drone. The epithelial cells lining the seminal vesicles secrete a small amount of seminal fluid during the maturation, making up about half of the total semen volume (Verma & Shuel, 1973). At the same time mucus is being produced and stored in the mucus glands.
At the time of mating, muscles in the abdomen of the drone contract creating pressure that everts the genitalia into the queen, turning the reproductive system inside out (Koeniger, 1986). The muscular contractions of the seminal vesicles aid in the ejaculation of the semen into the queen's vaginal passage and on to the median and lateral oviducts. The products of the male mucus gland (Colonello & Hartfelder, 2003) follow the semen and harden on contact to air (Bishop, 1920; AC and VW, personal observation). Immediately after eversion, the male is paralysed and falls away from the queen. The mucus plus the endophallus and cornua portions of the male genitalia, which are left behind, become the mating sign, visible outside of the queen's abdomen. From comparisons of mating behaviour in several species of Apis (Koeniger, 1990; Koeniger & Koeniger, 2000) it appears that the mucus and genital structures hold the drone in place during sperm transfer and the mating sign becomes a signal to other males following the queen. Koeniger (1986) proposed that the mucus may also serve to hold the queen's sting out of the way of the next mate.
The honey bee queen makes one to four flights (Roberts, 1944) away from the colony when she is about a week old, mating with from seven to 44 males in rapid succession (Taber, 1954; Moritz et al., 1996; Neumann et al., 1999; Tarpy & Page, 2001). Over the next 24–48 h, the sperm migrate to the spermatheca (Ruttner et al., 1971). This movement is enabled by contractions in the queen's abdomen (Koeniger, 1986), by sperm motility (Collins, 2000a) and the presence of spermathecal fluid (Gessner & Ruttner, 1977). Only about 3–5% of the sperm are actually retained in the spermatheca (Koeniger & Koeniger, 2000), the rest are lost from the queen.
Genetic studies using phenotypic markers have shown that sperm from all of the mated drones become randomly distributed within the spermatheca (Page et al., 1984) and relatively constant levels of all paternal types are represented in the worker offspring. Therefore there is little or no sperm competition, although different drones may contribute variable numbers of viable sperm (Woyke & Jasinski, 1978; Collins, 2004). The creation of colonies of multiple paternal lines of workers, or subfamilies, is evolutionarily desirable, as these colonies have the capability of responding readily to wide changes in the environment (Jones et al., 2004) and extreme polyandry increases the fitness of the queen by reducing the colony-level impact of her laying non-viable, diploid drone eggs (Tarpy & Page, 2001).
Results
A total of 234 spots were cut from 2-dimensional gels and analysed using peptide mass fingerprinting (MALDI-TOF) against the Genbank nunredundant (nr) and official bee protein sets, 90 from seminal vesicle tissue and 144 from semen, 90 picked from one gel (pH 3–10) and 54 from a second gel (pH 7–10). Using Mascot and the bee-specific database, we found significant GLEAN3 matches from 60 protein spots derived from seminal vesicles (54 unique protein IDs), plus one additional match to a novel peptide predicted by Genscan. We found 78 GLEAN3 matches to genes present in honey bee semen (33 of these are unique). Because we ran gels with overlapping pH ranges for the separation of semen proteins, there was greater redundancy of spots from these samples. There was also some biological redundancy with several neighbouring spots showing the same database matches. Tissues and semen were collected from six source drones and it is possible that redundant spots reflect both allelic (isozymic) variation as well as variation in the production or post-translational processing of proteins. In support of the latter, many identical matches were derived from spots with significantly different size or pH traits (Table 3). Interestingly we found no spots that matched non-bee entries in the GenBank database that did not also match a honey bee gene, attesting to both the completeness of the bee gene list and the difficulty in making Mascot fingerprinting identifications over this long evolutionary distance. A complete listing of all spots and results of analyses are listed in the Supplementary table.
Table 3.
Bee gene | No. | Spot no. |
---|---|---|
GB10485 | 2 | A33, B38 |
GB10973 | 2 | A46, B55 |
GB11965 | 2 | A7, A8 |
GB14798 | 2 | A49, C35 |
GB15079 | 2 | C8, C9 |
GB15550 | 2 | B43, B44 |
GB16546 | 2 | B32, C20 |
GB17626 | 2 | A26, B26 |
GB18917 | 2 | A77, A78 |
GB19387 | 2 | A39, B39 |
GB12546 | 3 | B40, B41, B42 |
GB13058 | 3 | A15, B85, C3 |
GB14311 | 3 | A14, B8, B88 |
GB18293 | 3 | A54, B61, B62 |
GB14501 | 4 | B16, B17, C5, C26 |
GB15039 | 4 | A34, B27, B28, C17 |
GB15561 | 4 | A68, B56, C36, C37 |
GB17473 | 4 | B72, B73, B82, C49 |
GB10514 | 5 | A18, A19, B10, B11, B13 |
GB14018 | 5 | A57, A81, B63, B64, B86 |
GB10122 | 6 | B12, B21, B22, B23, C7, C10 |
GB17864 | 6 | A35, A36, B34, B36, C27, C28 |
GB18109 | 7 | A51, A52, A53, B57, B58, B59, C38 |
BGB15171 | B12 | A24, A60, A72, B30, B31, B60 |
B67, B69, C16, C18, C43, C45 | ||
BGB16905 | B13 | A21, A22, B18, B19, B20, B33 |
B74, C6, C11, C13, C21, C23, C24 | ||
BGB15463 | B15 | A44, A45, A68, B43, B44, B45, B46 |
B47, B48, B56, C30, C31, C32, C36, C37 | ||
From mixed samples | ||
GB18538 | 3 | A3, A4, A5 |
Of the 69 unique honey bee proteins found 66 showed significant BLASTP matches to proteins in the genome of Drosophila melanogaster (e-value < 1.0 × e−10, Tables 1 and 2). Two of the remaining proteins (GB11987, spot A13; GB13059, spots A15, B85, C3; and GB18752, spots B90, C44) showed no non-bee matches in nr while the third de novo predicted gene (Group 1.17.1, spot A47) seems to be a widespread protein lost from the fly genome.
Table 1.
Gene name | Tissue | Dros42match | Dros42name | Dros42eval | GOGroup | Biological function (first) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GB10275 | sem ves | CG9277 | betaTub56D | 0 Cyt | cytoskeleton organization and biogenesis | |
GB11920 | sem ves | CG3401 | betaTub60D | 0 Cyt | axon guidance | |
GB13049 | sem ves | CG9277 | betaTub56D | 0 Cyt | cytoskeleton organization and biogenesis | |
GB14141 | sem ves | CG3937 | cher | 0 Cyt | cytoskeleton organization and biogenesis | |
GB18365 | sem ves | CG18290 | Act87E | 0 Cyt | cytoskeleton organization and biogenesis | |
GB92659 | sem ves | CG8938 | GstS1 | 8.1E-37 Cyt | cytoskeleton organization and biogenesis | |
GB10133 | sem ves | CG11793 | Sod | 2.2E-57 DE | ageing | |
GB10498 | sem ves | CG11765 | Prx2540 | 1.4E-95 DE | defensemen responsemen | |
GB12741 | sem ves | CG3752 | Aldh | 0 DE | defensemen responsemen | |
GB14852 | sem ves | CG4264 | Hsc70 | 0 DE | defensemen responsemen | |
GB19860 | sem ves | CG8542 | Hsc70 | 0 DE | defensemen responsemen | |
GB10989 | sem ves | CG3762 | Vha68 | 0 Enrg | ATP biosynthesis | |
GB11385 | sem ves | CG3731 | CG3731 | 0 Enrg | mitochondrial electron transport | |
GB13596 | sem ves | CG11154 | ATPsyn | 0 Enrg | ATP biosynthesis | |
GB19171 | sem ves | CG17369 | Vha55 | 0 Enrg | ATP biosynthesis | |
GB92538 | sem ves | CG7460 | CG7460 | 3.5E-33 Enrg | electron transport | |
GB19460 | sem ves | CG6058 | Ald | 5E-144 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB10139 | sem ves | CG1743 | Gs2 | 1E-160 Met | glutamate catabolism | |
GB15662 | sem ves | CG10962 | CG10962 | 2.4E-44 Met | metabolism | |
GB16448 | sem ves | CG5730 | AnnIX | 1E-123 Met | lipid metabolism | |
GB17238 | sem ves | CG11876 | CG11876 | 2E-138 Met | pyruvate metabolism | |
GB19030 | sem ves | CG10638 | CG10638 | 5E-96 Met | aldehyde metabolism | |
GB10710 | sem ves | CG5939 | Prm | 0 Mus | mesoderm development | |
GB10939 | sem ves | CG4843 | Tm2 | 2E-121 Mus | muscle contraction | |
GB11965 | sem ves | CG17927 | Mhc | 0 Mus | cytokinesis | |
GB13399 | sem ves | CG2184 | Mlc2 | 4E-55 Mus | muscle contraction | |
GB18538 | sem ves | CG5939 | Prm | 5E-159 Mus | mesoderm development | |
GB18917 | sem ves | CG4254 | tsr | 2.1E-73 Mus | actin filament depolymerization | |
Group1-17.1 | sem ves | CG4898 | Tm1 | 3.6E-33 Mus | dendrite morphogenesis | |
GB11987 | sem ves | none | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
GB13058 | sem ves | none | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
GB16951 | sem ves | CG10120 | Men | 0 TCA | tricarboxylic acid cycle | |
GB17439 | sem ves | CG17246 | Scs | 0 TCA | tricarboxylic acid cycle | |
GB15718 | sem ves | CG14207 | CG14207 | 1.1E-68 | none | |
GB18647 | sem ves | CG10691 | l(2)37Cc | 2E-116 | DNA replication | |
GB18969 | sem ves | CG12101 | Hsp60 | 0 | de novo′ protein folding |
GO group assigned by 3 biological function notations. Only first is cited in table.
Table 2.
Gene name | tissue | Dros42match | Dros42name | Dros42eval | GOGroup | Biological function (first) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GB10485 | both | CG3085 | CG3085 | 1E-113 Cyt | microtubule cytoskeleton | |
GB14018 | both | CG6647 | porin | 7.5E-32 Enrg | anion transport | |
GB14798 | both | CG12055 | Gapdh1 | 1E-143 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB15039 | both | CG17654 | Eno | 2E-135 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB15052 | both | CG1721 | Pglym78 | 6E-113 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB15463 | both | CG6058 | Ald | 1.9E-97 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB17626 | both | CG7430 | CG7430 | 0 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB19387 | both | CG3001 | Hex | 9E-158 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB15561 | both | CG10160 | ImpL3 | 1.8E-91 GLYOX | glyoxylate cycle | |
GB15171 | both | CG8782 | Oat | 4E-85 Met | amino acid biosynthesis | |
GB16738 | both | CG7113 | scu | 7.7E-52 Met | acyl-CoA metabolism | |
GB16905 | both | CG7920 | CG7920 | 3E-141 Met | acetyl-CoA metabolism | |
GB17864 | both | CG7920 | CG7920 | 6E-155 Met | acetyl-CoA metabolism | |
GB18293 | both | CG11876 | CG11876 | 2E-111 Met | pyruvate metabolism | |
GB10514 | both | CG1913 | alphaTub84B | 0 | cell motility | |
GB10973 | both | CG32031 | Argk | 2E-168 | phosphorylation | |
GB14311 | both | CG3213 | CG3213 | 2.4E-34 | protein biosynthesis | |
GB18109 | both | CG6084 | CG6084 | 3E-117 | n/a | |
GB10122 | semen | CG9277 | betaTub56D | 0 Cyt | cytoskeleton organization and biogenesis | |
GB14501 | semen | CG32819 | CG32819 | 1E-160 Cyt | microtubule cytoskeleton | |
GB11769 | semen | CG17146 | Adk1 | 6.3E-46 Enrg | ATP metabolism | |
GB11056 | semen | CG3127 | Pgk | 1E-173 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB16546 | semen | CG7430 | CG7430 | 6E-158 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB17473 | semen | CG2171 | Tpi | 3E-80 GLY | glycolysis | |
GB14517 | semen | CG7176 | Idh | 0 GLYOX | glyoxylate cycle | |
GB10467 | semen | CG4233 | Got2 | 0 Met | aspartate metabolism | |
GB12546 | semen | CG7899 | Acph | 2.4E-53 Met | phosphate metabolism | |
GB15079 | semen | CG5320 | Gdh | 0 Met | NOT sperm storage | |
GB18752 | semen | none | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
GB11512 | semen | CG7264 | CG7264 | 4.1E-36 | n/a | |
GB12716 | semen | CG4409 | CG4409 | 2.8E-11 | n/a | |
GB14399 | semen | CG18335 | CG18335 | 0 | n/a | |
GB15550 | semen | CG32031 | Argk | 2E-119 | phosphorylation |
Eighteen identified proteins were found in both seminal vesicle and semen samples, 36 were unique to the seminal vesicle and only 15 were unique to semen (although they might have come from somewhere else in the male reproductive tract). This latter number is an under-representation of semen-unique proteins by Fisher's exact test (P = 0.04) (Sokal & Rohlf, 1995). Proteins were grouped by Gene Ontology biological processes using the parent terms cytoskeleton, defense, energy, glycolysis, glyoxylate cycle, metabolism, muscle, tricarboxylic acid cycle or other (Tables 1 and 2). The identified proteins from this sampling were diverse (37 of 69 had distinct GO biological functions) but included some apparent functional biases. Overall, the proteins showed an abundance of genes involved in metabolism and cytoskeletal function. The GO parent groupings fell out differentially for the two protein sources (Table 4; global G-test, P = 0.003), with an excess of muscle-related and cytoskeletal genes in the seminal-vesicle proteins and an excess of proteins related to glycolysis (and possibly the glyoxylate cycle) in the semen samples. Most proteins (38 of 66 unique GB matches) were predicted by pSortII to reside in the cytoplasm, followed by mitochondria (18 of 66). Only two proteins (GB12716 and GB18752) were predicted to be extracellular, and both of these were found only in the semen component.
Table 4.
GO Class | Seminal vesicle only | Semen only | Both | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|
Cytoskeleton | 6 | 2 | 1 | 9 |
Defense | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
Glycolysis | 1 | 3 | 6 | 10 |
Glyoxylate cycle | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
Metabolism | 5 | 3 | 5 | 13 |
Mitochondrial/energy | 5 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
Muscle | 7 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
Other | 3 | 4 | 4 | 11 |
TCA | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Total | 34 | 14 | 18 | 66 |
Discussion
Sperm is stored by honey bee queens, and queens of other social insects, for years prior to fertilization. In honey bees, sperm has also been shown to remain viable for extended periods in vitro at ambient temperatures. Collins (2000a) held semen alone in sealed capillary tubes up to 1 year, and found viability did not begin to drop until about 9 weeks and in some samples remained above 50% for up to 6 months, a remarkable survival rate compared with other higher animals.
This survey provides the first global look at sperm-related proteins in honey bees and the first, to our knowledge, genome-enabled proteomic survey of semen proteins in an insect. The results indicate constitutional biases in sperm-related proteins as well as information on the potential sources of semen proteins. A high number of the proteins identified in these samples showed significant matches to Drosophila (66 of 69 at < e−10) indicating that this is a fairly conserved set of proteins.
When organized into GO groups there is an apparent over-representation of genes implicated in the glycolysis pathway (10 of 55 proteins that could be associated with a GO biological function). Other carbohydrate metabolism genes were also present (from the Krebs’ and glyoxylate cycles) along with two antioxidative enzymes, superoxide dismutase (SOD), and glutathione-S-transferase (GOT). Regarding SOD and GOT, previous studies of enzyme activity (Weirich et al., 2002) and gene expression (Collins et al., 2004) targeted these as two of three potential antioxidants in reproductive tissues. SOD was expressed in semen, one-third of the activity directly associated with the sperm fraction, and at similar levels in the spermathecae of mated and virgin queens. GOT was found in the spermatheca at higher levels after mating, but not in semen. Our third subject enzyme in these previous studies, catalase, was significant in that it was almost entirely associated with the sperm itself, as opposed to seminal fluid and was also expressed at higher levels in spermathecae of mated queens (Weirich et al., 2002). It is surprising that we did not identify catalase in the current survey, a result perhaps reflective of its low abundance in seminal fluid and/or its membrane association in sperm.
We found significant biases in metabolism-associated proteins in semen vs. the seminal vesicle. Blum et al. (1962) found high levels of sugars, especially glucose, fructose and trehalose, in the seminal fluid as well as phospholipids. The sugars were rapidly oxidized. Verma & Shuel (1973; Verma, 1978) speculated that the sugars and phospholipids were the primary sources of energy for motility of sperm. Previous observations of motility in honey bee semen by Poole & Edwards (1970) demonstrated that the spermatozoa became non-motile within a short period, but the addition of sugars to the semen restored motility. Verma & Shuel, (1973) also found that sperm were motile for only 6 h in an extender with no oxidizable substrate. While we can not directly infer the metabolic processes endogenous to sperm (and seminal fluid) from this project, the protein biases are suggestive of the specific metabolic (and catabolic) activities that sustain sperm prior to and during mating.
A comparative study of mammalian, avian and honey bee semen by Kraft et al. (1978) reported that honey bee sperm were unusual in that they used only the Embden–Meyerhof glycolysis cycle for metabolism, and not the Krebs’ cycle. They commented that this would be highly adaptive for sperm that remained inactive for extended periods. We found no TCA enzymes in semen, although there were two in the seminal vesicles.
The Acps from flies rarely have orthologs in bees based on the honey bee genome annotation (HBGSC, 2006). This may reflect shorter Acp length, but it seems more likely that this is a corroboration of the dogma of fast-evolution for these genes. Mueller et al. (2004) used comparative structural modelling to infer conserved protein functional classes of 52 of the predicted seminal proteins. These classes included: regulators of proteolysis, lipid-modifying enzymes (lipase-related), lectins, cysteine-rich proteins of the CRISP family, an antioxidant, antimicrobial peptides, and one RNase. In our continuing studies of the reproductive tissues of the honey bee, we will look for proteins of similar function. The proteolytic proteins may be involved in sperm motility, and similar Acps in Drosophila may serve as coagulation factors related to mating plug formation. Proteins with lipid-binding sites and lectins would participate in lipid and carbohydrate metabolism, respectively, already suggested as the energy sources for honey bee sperm (Verma & Shuel, 1973). The presence of an antioxidant agrees with our own studies showing three such enzymes as important components of semen and present at high levels in the spermatheca. We did not include mucus glands in the present study, but Colonello & Hartfelder (2003) reported only three dominant and three minor polypeptides present.
High rates of sequence evolution aside, it is not too surprising that a group of proteins intimately associated with reproductive biology are dissimilar between two insects with such different reproductive behaviour and physiology. The Drosophila female generally mates with one male at a time, although she may mate again after oviposition. There is behavioural competition between male Drosophila for mates during extensive courtship rituals. The matings generally last for 15–20 min, also excluding other males, and there is documented sperm competition for fertilization (Simmons, 2001). Proteins from the male accessory gland in seminal fluid and the mating plug aid in protection of the male investment by reducing the female tendency to mate again, and spur the initiation of egg laying. For the honey bee drone the key competitive hurdle is in reaching the female first from the drone ‘comet’ that follows her in flight – a competition that relies more on visual acuity and flight physiology. Matings are rapid, taking a matter of seconds, and females often mate several times in immediate succession (Koeniger, 1986). In contrast to many insects (Gillott, 2003) the honey bee mating plug does not seem to negatively affect the success of subsequent mates, and indeed might actually aid this success (Koeniger, 1986). Nor does it affect the future viability of the queen (Colonello & Hartfelder, 2005). While mating barriers, per se, seem less likely in honey bees than in other insects, the possibility still remains that the drone-provided proteins have strong effects on the physiology of queens.
Drosophila males have one pair of accessory glands with two cell types (Chapman & Davis, 2004); drones have two separate glands, paired seminal vesicles and mucus glands. Similar research on the mucus gland of the honey bee shows that by maturity the number of components has been reduced to three dominant polypeptides and three minor ones (Colonello & Hartfelder, 2003). For the bumble bee, Bombus terrestris, Baer et al. (2000, 2001) report that the mucus plug contains four fatty acids and a dipeptide, but it is the fatty acid, linoleic acid, which inhibits remating. This species mates only once. The mucus/genitalia-tissue plug of the stingless bee, Melipona quadrifasciata, inhibits remating also, but simply by the mechanical stimulation of the queen's abdomen (Melo et al., 2001).
We know little or nothing about changes that take place in the spermatozoa as they move from the testes to the seminal vesicles to the spermatheca to fertilization of the egg. In other domestic animals, primarily mammals, there are significant changes (activation, capacitation and the acrosome reaction) that occur during the migration within the male and after deposition in the female reproductive tract that are critical to the final act of fertilization of the egg. However, there have been few indications of similar shifts in physiology during sperm maturation or sperm storage in insects. The proteins found in the seminal vesicle and semen might guide us to a better understanding of sperm developmental stages in the honey bee and thus to insects in general.
Similar proteomic and genomic-centred analyses continue with a focus on the spermatheca and its contents, before and after mating. Differences in pH between the semen and reproductive tract that function for orientation of the sperm to the spermathecal duct, may be only one factor in the changed metabolic processes during storage. Future studies also need to investigate enzymes in testes, where spermiogenesis occurs, as well as the ejaculatory and spermathecal ducts. In a histochemical study Schoeters & Billen (2000) found polysaccharides in spermathecal ducts of queens but not workers, and suggested that these sugars provided energy for activation of sperm prior to fertilization. Klenk et al. (2004) identified an SDS–PAGE gel band from spermathecal fluid as a 29 kDa protein somewhat homologous to triosephosphate isomerase. They suggested that it was not serving a glycolytic function in the queen but aiding in sperm storage. Results from our continuing studies will provide more insight into the remarkable durability of honey bee sperm and how it is supported by the queen's physiology.
The work reported here highlights the invaluable data that have been made available through the Honey Bee Genome Project. Our initial peptide mass fingerprinting efforts using existing databases for honey bees and other insects showed < 5% hit rates, a 10-fold lower rate than when the honey bee genomic data were included. The availability of a genome-wide predicted bee protein list and the genome sequences themselves was essential to this project and will provide extensive new opportunities for proteomic research in honey bees.
Experimental procedures
Chemicals
Chemicals for electrophoresis including acrylamide, bis-acrylamide, SDS, TEMED, ammonium persulphate, agarose, 2-mercaptoethanol, CHAPS, Triton-X-100 and ampholytes (Bio-Lytes, pH 3–10 and pH 7–10) were purchased from Bio-Rad (Hercules, CA, USA). Trizma-Base (Tris), EDTA, dithiothreitol (DTT), glycerol and thiourea, were purchased from Sigma (St Louis, MO, USA). Alpha-cyanohydroxycinnamic acid (CHCA) matrix was purchased from Bruker Daltonics (Billerica, MA, USA) and urea was from Pierce (Sequanal grade, Rockford, IL, USA). All other chemicals were reagent or HPLC grade laboratory chemicals.
Tissue collection
Free-flying mature drones of commercial Italian stock were collected from several colonies maintained by the Bee Research Laboratory, Beltsville, MD, USA. Drones that had overwintered in the hive in Maryland were collected in February. Seminal vesicles were removed from six drones, those that did not evert in the process of dissection, and were frozen at −80 °C in a polypropylene tube. Semen was collected in November using the standard method of ejaculation and collection in a sterile capillary tube (Harbo, 1974). The 28 µl pooled sample representing 34 drones was also stored frozen at −80 °C in a polypropylene tube.
Protein extraction from tissues
Proteins were extracted from tissues essentially using the method described by Stadler & Hales (2002). Briefly, tissues were homogenized mechanically with a pestle in 0.15 ml 10 mm sodium phosphate buffer in 139 mm sodium chloride, pH 7.2. One millilitre of cold chloroform/methanol (1 : 4), was added, vortexed and sonicated. The solution was centrifuged at 16 000 g for 10 min at 4 °C. Supernatant solution was discarded and methanol (1 ml) was added to the pellet, which was mechanically disrupted, sonicated and centrifuged as before. The final pellet was vacuum dried to remove residual methanol and re-suspended in IPG strip rehydration buffer: 8 m urea, 1 m thiourea, 50 mm DTT, 4% CHAPS, 0.5% Bio-Lytes using mechanical disruption and sonication. Insoluble material was removed by centrifugation at 15 000 g for 2 min at room temperature. The concentration of protein in tissue extracts was determined by the method of Lowry (Peterson, 1977) following precipitation with TCA (Nerurkar et al., 1981). Bovine serum albumin was used as a standard.
Two-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (2D-PAGE)
The first dimension IEF was performed using 11 cm IPG strips (pH 3–10 or pH 7–10, Bio-Rad) in the IPGphor II system (GE Healthcare, Piscataway, NJ, USA). All IPG strips were rehydrated in the presence of 500 µg protein in a total volume 185 µl rehydration buffer; additional rehydration buffer contained the following: 8 m urea, 4% CHAPS, 50 mm DTT, 0.5% Bio-Lytes, 0.001% bromophenol blue. The strips were passively rehydrated for 16 h at 20 °C and voltage settings for isoelectric focusing were: 500 V for 30 min, 1000 V for 30 min, and 8000 V maximum to a total of 30 kVh. The focused strips were either immediately run on a second dimension polyacrylamide gel or rinsed in water and then stored at −80 °C. For the second dimension gel electrophoresis, the gel strips were incubated with equilibration buffer 1 (0.4 m Tris–HCl pH 8.8, 6 m urea, 20% glycerol, 2% SDS, 1% DTT, 0.001% bromophenol blue) for 5 min and fresh buffer was added for an additional 15 min. Strips were then incubated in the same equilibration buffer containing 2.5% iodoacetamide for an additional 15 min. Finally, excess iodoacetamide was removed by soaking strips (5 min) in the buffer containing 0.06 m Tris–HCl (pH 6.7), 6 m urea, 20% glycerol, 2% SDS, 0.001% bromophenol blue, 0.5% DTT. Each strip was rinsed in dH20 and subsequently placed on to a 12% polyacrylamide gel (16 × 20 cm) with Tris–glycine buffer system as described by Laemmli (1970). Strips were overlayed with 2.5% low melting agarose sealing solution (0.06 m Tris base, 0.1% SDS, 0.01 m DTT and 0.001% bromophenol blue, pH 6.7). Electrophoresis was performed overnight, using the PROTEAN II xi system (Bio-Rad) at 30 °C using a 2 × buffer solution in the top chamber (0.38 m glycine, 0.5 m Tris, 0.2% SDS, pH 8.3) and a 1 × buffer solution in the bottom chamber for 1100–1200 Vh and 9.5 mA/gel. The 2-D PAGE gels were visualized by staining with Colloidal Coomassie Blue G-250 (Newsholme et al., 2000). Briefly, gels were fixed overnight in 50% ethanol and 3% phosphoric acid followed by three washes with distilled water. Gels were prestained for 1 h in 34% methanol, 17% ammonium sulphate and 3% phosphoric acid and finally the gels were stained in the same solution containing Coomassie Blue G-250 (0.066%) for 2–3 days. The gels were stored in 10% ammonium sulphate solution and scanned using laser densitometry (PDSI, GE Healthcare). Duplicate gels were used for each protein sample.
In gel digestion of proteins
Protein spots were excised from the stained gel and stored in dH20. Thawed gel material was washed first with a destaining solution water/methanol/acetic acid (4.5 : 4.5 : 1), then in dH20 and finally in 50% acetonitrile containing 25 mm ammonium bicarbonate. The gel plug was dehydrated with 100% acetonitrile, dried under vacuum, and then re-swollen with 20 µl of 10 µg/ml trypsin (modified porcine trypsin, sequencing grade, Promega, Madison, WI, USA) in 25 mm ammonium bicarbonate. An additional 20 µl 25 mm ammonium bicarbonate buffer was added to cover the gel plug. Digestion was performed overnight at 37 °C. The resulting tryptic fragments were extracted with 50% acetonitrile and 5% trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) with sonication. The extract was dried to completeness by vacuum centrifugation and then dissolved in 50% acetonitrile and 0.1% TFA.
Protein identification
MALDI-TOF-MS analysis
A Voyager DE-STR MALDI-TOF mass spectrometer (Applied Biosystems, Framingham, MA, USA) operated in positive ion reflector mode was used to analyse tryptic peptides. Samples were cocrystallized with α-cyanohydroxycinnamic acid (CHCA) matrix, and spectra were acquired with 50 shots of a 337 nm Nitrogen Laser operating at 20 Hz. Spectra were calibrated using the trypsin autolysis peaks at m/z 842.51 and 2211.10 as internal standards.
Database searching
Protein identification was performed by searching two distinct databases. First, the US National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) nonredundant database was searched using the Mascot search engine on the Matrix Science public domain server (http://www.matrixscience.com). Second, a honey bee specific database was generated using all of the genome-annotated protein calls (GLEAN3, HBGSC, 2006) combined with a partially redundant database of ab initio proteins predicted by Genscan (Burge & Karlin, 1997) and FGENESH+ (http://www.softberry.com). In total this database contained 46 720 protein sequences and 14 133 680 residues specific to the honey bee genome. Peptide mass fingerprints were searched against this database on a local Mascot server. The following parameters were used for both nr and local database searches with peptide mass fingerprinting data: monoisotopic mass, 25 p.p.m. mass accuracy, trypsin as digesting enzyme with one missed cleavage allowed and carbamidomethylation of cysteine, oxidation of methionine, N-terminal pyroglutamic acid from glutamic acid or glutamine as allowable variable modifications. Taxonomy was limited to animals for the searches of NCBI nr database, no taxonomy limitations were imposed on the searches of the bee database as it contained only Apis mellifera sequences. To qualify the MALDI-TOF-MS data as a positive identification, a protein's score was equal to or exceeded the minimum significant score. For searches of the NCBI nr database, that cut-off score for a significant (P < 0.05) match was 72, and for the bee database 59. In the end, there were no matches to nr database that were not reflected as matches against the honey bee-specific database. Accordingly, all sequence comparisons were carried out using the honey bee match set.
Comparative sequence analysis
Unique honey bee proteins identified through Mascot (n = 70) were used in local BLASTP searches against the Drosophila melanogaster genome sequence (version 4.2, http://www.flybase.org), with a significance cut-off of 1.0 × e−5 and the BLOSUM62 search algorithm. Honey bee proteins that failed to find a Drosophila match were then used to query the NCBI nr database (at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) by BLASTP and the same conditions. Drosophila matches to the honey bee proteins were placed on to chromosomal locations, and into Gene Ontology (GO) Biological Function child terms (database downloaded from http://www.godatabase.org/cgi-bin/amigo/go.cgi). These terms were then grouped, where possible into higher level GO biological function terms. Honey bee protein predictions were also placed into likely subcellular and extracellular locations using the trained sorting algorithm pSortII, as described at http://wolfsport.seq.cbrc.jp
Statistical analyses of results
Honey bee protein matches were divided into those found only in seminal vesicle extractions, those found only in semen extractions, and those found in both extractions. G-tests were used to assess overall distributional bias between these tissues, and to survey for differential presence of specific GO parent terms in either of the two sample types.
Acknowledgments
Our thanks to Amy Shannon for instruction and assistance with electrophoresis, protein extraction and digestion, and to Andy Ulsamer and I. Bart Smith for semen collection and bee wrangling, and to Bret Cooper for help with the honey bee Mascot server. We sincerely thank the members of the Honey Bee Genome Consortium for availability of the predicted protein list and genome sequences.
Supplementary material
The following material is available for this article online:
This material is available as part of the online article from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com
References
- Baer B, Maile R, Schmid-Hempel P, Morgan ED, Jones ED. Chemistry of a mating plug in bumblebees. J Chem Ecol. 2000;26:1869–1875. [Google Scholar]
- Baer B, Morgan ED, Schmid-Hempel P. A nonspecific fatty acid within the bumblebee mating plug prevents females from remating. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:3926–3928. doi: 10.1073/pnas.061027998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bishop GH. Fertilization in the honey-bee I. The male sexual organs: their histological structure and physiological functioning. J Exp Zool. 1920;31:225–265. [Google Scholar]
- Blum MS, Glowska Z, Taber SI. Chemistry of the drone honey bee reproductive system II. Carbohydrates in the reproductive organs and semen. Ann Entomol Soc Am. 1962;55:135–139. [Google Scholar]
- Boomsma JJ, Baer B, Heinze J. The evolution of male traits in social insects. Annu Rev Entomol. 2005;50:395–420. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.50.071803.130416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Burge C, Karlin S. Prediction of complete gene structures in human genomic DNA. J Mol Biol. 1997;268:78–94. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.1997.0951. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chapman T. Seminal fluid-mediated fitness traits in Drosophila. Heredity. 2001;87:511–521. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2540.2001.00961.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chapman T, Davis SJ. Functions and analysis of the seminal fluid proteins of male Drosophila melanogaster fruit flies. Peptides. 2004;25:1477–1490. doi: 10.1016/j.peptides.2003.10.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Collins AM. Relationship between semen quality and performance of instrumentally inseminated honey bee queens. Apidologie. 2000a;31:421–429. [Google Scholar]
- Collins AM. Survival of honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) spermatozoa stored at above-freezing temperatures. J Econ Entomol. 2000b;93:568–571. doi: 10.1603/0022-0493-93.3.568. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Collins AM. Sources of variation in the viability of honey bee, Apis mellifera L., semen collected for artificial insemination. Invert Reprod Dev. 2004;45:231–237. [Google Scholar]
- Collins AM, Williams V, Evans JD. Sperm storage and antioxidative enzyme expression in the honey bee, Apis mellifera. Insect Mol Biol. 2004;13:141–146. doi: 10.1111/j.0962-1075.2004.00469.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Colonello NA, Hartfelder K. Protein content and pattern during mucus gland maturation and its ecdysteroid control in honey bee drones. Apidologie. 2003;34:257–267. [Google Scholar]
- Colonello NA, Hartfelder K. She's my girl – male accessory gland products and their function in the reproductive physiology of social bees. Apidologie. 2005;36:231–244. [Google Scholar]
- Gessner B, Ruttner F. Transfer der Spermatozoen in die Spermatheka der Bienenkonigin. Apidologie. 1977;8:1–18. [Google Scholar]
- Gillott C. Male accessory gland secretions: modulators of female reproductive physiology and behavior. Annu Rev Entomol. 2003;48:163–184. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.48.091801.112657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Harbo JR. A technique for handling stored semen of honey bees. Ann Entomol Soc Am. 1974;67:191–194. [Google Scholar]
- Harbo JR. Instrumental insemination of queen bees – 1985: Part 1 and Part 2. Am Bee J. 1985;125(197–202):282–287. [Google Scholar]
- Hoage TR, Kessel RG. An electron microscope study of the process of differentiation during spermatogenesis in the drone honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) with special reference to centriole replication and elimination. J Ultrastructure Res. 1968;24:6–32. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5320(68)80014-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Honey Bee Genome Sequencing Consortium. Insights into social insects from the genome of the honeybee Apis mellifera. Nature. 2006 doi: 10.1038/nature05260. in press. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Jones JCMR, Myerscough MR, Graham S, Oldroyd BP. Honey bee nest thermoregulation: diversity promotes stability. Science. 2004;305:402–404. doi: 10.1126/science.1096340. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Klenk M, Koeniger G, Koeniger N, Fasold H. Proteins in spermathecal gland secretion and spermathecal fluid and the propoerties of a 29 kDa protein in queens of Apis mellifera. Apidologie. 2004;35:371–381. [Google Scholar]
- Koeniger G. Reproduction and mating behavior. In: Rinderer TE, editor. Bee Genetics and Breeding. London: Academic Press; 1986. pp. 255–280. [Google Scholar]
- Koeniger G. The mating sign in honey bee Apis mellifera L. does it hinder or promote multiple mating? Anim Behav. 1990;39:444–449. [Google Scholar]
- Koeniger N, Koeniger G. Reproductive isolation among species of the genus Apis. Apidologie. 2000;31:313–339. [Google Scholar]
- Kraft LA, Foley CW, Howarth B, Jr, Blum MS, Johnson AD. Radiorespirometric studies of carbohydrate metabolism by washed spermatozoa of various species. Comp Biochem Physiol. 1978;60:233–238. doi: 10.1016/0305-0491(78)90093-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kubli E. Sex-peptides: seminal pepetides of the Drosophila male. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2003;60:1689–1704. doi: 10.1007/s00018-003-3052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Laemmli U. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of the bacteriophage T4. Nature. 1970;227:680–685. doi: 10.1038/227680a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Laidlaw HH., Jr . Instrumental Insemination of Honey Bee Queens: APictorial Instructional Manual. Hamilton, IL: Dadant and Sons, Inc; 1977. [Google Scholar]
- Melo GAR, Buschini MLT, Campos LA.O. Ovarian activation in Melipona quadrifasciata queens triggered by mating plug stimulation. Apidologie. 2001;32:355–361. [Google Scholar]
- Moritz RFA. The Instrumental Insemination of the Queen Bee. Rumania: Apimondia; [Google Scholar]
- Moritz RF.A, Kryger P, Allsopp MH. Competition for royalty in bees. Nature. 1996;384:31. [Google Scholar]
- Mueller JL, Ripoli DR, Aquadro CF, Wolfner MF. Comparative structural modeling and inference of conserved protein classes in Drosophila seminal fluid. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:13542–13547. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0405579101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nerurkar LS, Marino PA, Adams DO. Quantification of selected intracellular and secreted hydrolases of macrophages. In: Herscowitz HB, Holden HT, Bellanti JA, Ghaffer A, editors. Manual of Macrophage Methodology. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.; 1981. pp. 229–247. [Google Scholar]
- Neubaum DM, Wolfner MF. Mated Drosophila melanogaster females require a seminal fluid protein, Acp36DE, to store sperm efficiently. Genetics. 1999;153:845–857. doi: 10.1093/genetics/153.2.845. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Neumann P, Moritz RF.A, Mautz D. Using DNA microsatellites for maternity testing in honeybee (Apsi mellifera L.) Apidologie. 1999;30:505–512. [Google Scholar]
- Newsholme SJ, Maleeft BF, Steiner S, Anderson NL, Schwartz LW. Two-dimensional electrophoresis of liver proteins: characterization of a drug-induced hepatomegaly in rats. Electrophoresis. 2000;21:2122–2128. doi: 10.1002/1522-2683(20000601)21:11<2122::AID-ELPS2122>3.0.CO;2-#. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Page RE, Kimsey RB, Laidlaw HH., Jr Migration and dispersal of spermatozoa in spermathecae of queen honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) Experientia. 1984;40:182–184. [Google Scholar]
- Peterson GL, et al. A simplification of the protein assay method of Lowry. Anal Biochem. 1977;83:346–356. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(77)90043-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Poole HK, Edwards JF. Induction of motility in honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) spermatozoa by sugars. Experientia. 1970;26:859–860. doi: 10.1007/BF02114223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Roberts WC. Multiple mating of queen bees proved by progeny and flight tests. Gleanings Bee Culture. 1944;72:255–260. [Google Scholar]
- Ruttner F, Enbergs H, Kriesten K. The fine structure of the spermatheca of the queen bee (Apis mellifera L.) [Translation] Apidologie. 1971;2:67–97. [Google Scholar]
- Schoeters E, Billen J. The importance of the spermathecal duct in bumblebees. J Insect Physiol. 2000;46:1303–1312. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1910(00)00052-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Simmons LW. Sperm Competition and its Evolutionary Consequences in the Insects. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Snodgrass RE. The Anatomy of the Honey Bee. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; 1963. Fourth printing. [Google Scholar]
- Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. Biometry: the Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research. 3. New York: W.H. Freeman; 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Stadler F, Hales D. Highly-resolving two-dimensional electrophoresis for the study of insect proteins. Proteomics. 2002;2:1347–1353. doi: 10.1002/1615-9861(200209)2:9<1347::AID-PROT1347>3.0.CO;2-P. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Taber SI. The frequency of multiple mating of queen honey bees. J Econ Entomol. 1954;47:995–998. [Google Scholar]
- Taber SI, Blum MS. Preservation of honey bee semen. Science. 1960;131:1734–1735. doi: 10.1126/science.131.3415.1734. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tarpy DR, Page RE., Jr The curious promiscuity of queen honey bees (Apis mellifera): evolutionary and behavioral mechanisms. Ann Zool Fennici. 2001;38:255–265. [Google Scholar]
- Verma LR. Biology of honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) spermatozoa I. Effect of different diluents on motility and survival. Apidologie. 1978;9:167–174. [Google Scholar]
- Verma LR, Shuel RW. Respiratory metabolism of the semen of the honey-bee, Apis mellifera. J Insect Physiol. 1973;19:97–103. [Google Scholar]
- Weirich GAM, Collins AM, Williams V. Antioxidant enzymes in the honey bee, Apis mellifera. Apidologie. 2002;33:3–14. [Google Scholar]
- Wolfner MF. The gifts that keep on giving: physiological functions and evolutionary dynamics of male seminal proteins in Drosophila. Heredity. 2002;88:85–93. doi: 10.1038/sj.hdy.6800017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Woyke J, Jasinski Z. Influence of age of drones on the results of instrumental insemination of honeybee queens. Apidologie. 1978;9:203–212. [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.